chchyong89, better bribe me one unit otherwise I cheong sui your product.

I strive to be evil and all that.

the receiver used is simply configured to output i2s.

Yes you can tap the I2S directly.

ya guise, be patient.


(grabbing one unit from chchyong89 and lols at ya'll)

I have not looked at the boards myself, but the output decoupling caps are not bypassed by film caps.

Anyone who prefers a DIY upgrade should bypass the output caps with a decent pair of film caps. Vishay Rodersteins recommended.

this DAC is the next step up to PCM270x DACs.

You can think of the PCM270x as CMOYs of the DACs. They are just this basic!

yes. Ordnance = PCM270x, meaning cmoys of DACs

Well, for believers, it is also wise to put cables as the last thing to upgrade. There are other things in the chain that is more important than cables, by a significant amount.

Very hard lor, this is not exactly CPU, where raw performance > everything else.

When I was talking about PCM270x being cmoys, I was actually comparing the "building blocks" used. In this context, PCM270x if used solo for DAC, is very "cmoy-ish" because there is almost nothing simpler than this.

Truth is, after solo PCM270x DACs, things becomes less simple and it's really all about DAC specs, designs and implementations. To make matters worse, after you surpass a certain higher level, everything boils down to preference. If you're only interested in raw figures between DACs, the datasheets are a good start

I'd say for the PCM1794, it beats the WM8051 hands down. They are very different chips for different applications. WM8051 is inferior because everything is packed on the single die and you don't have much options for external enhancement. Well, at this point, it's like comparing a mobile CPU chip for notebooks to desktop CPU chips for PCs. Not quite a fair comparison.

If anyone is wondering what the DAC is like, it's closer to the Gamma1. Except it uses a slightly different processor chip (PCM2706). At this price, you're getting something good. Rest assured.


P.S. Chchyong89 bribed me so instead of heckling his thread, I have no choice but to speak good words about this product.









lol nah, just j/k

This post has been edited by LittleGhost: Jan 20 2011, 09:34 PM

sorta off topic, but the HD650 is really much better off with a headamp first. This DAC is line out and is not so proper for big headphones like the HD650.

Cables don't change the impedance characteristics of the drivers, it's still going to need a lot of drive from amps, whether you like it or not(hint hint).

You can't

The native drivers only do USB 1.1

the pioneer is Texas Instrument.

Design in engineer's context means construction of a circuit to achieve specific goals. To outsiders, this is probably not "original". So unless it's a ground breaking new concept of new topologies or designs, there's no "pioneering" in most analog circuits. (considering they are that old and almost thoroughly explored).

it works.

USB native audio drivers should be available on MAC IIRC.

this dac practically works with ANY multimedia speakers.

Multimedia speakers = computer intended speaker sets.

This DAC only has 2 channels.

Means only the green wire applies. You don't need the rest.

You won't use this for multichannel gaming because it was not designed to do so. All music files are encoded and recorded in 2 channels, so anything more is moot.

I don't think so. Because it's pretty much hardware limited. The conversion has to be done on the hardware itself. The speaker must be capable of converting to 5.1.

However, if you have a sound card with multi channel output but a 2 channel music file, you can choose to do software conversion.

It simply does not work.

Anyway, even if it does, it affects quality. Though apparently still usable for many people.

Digital attenuation causes loss of bits, so an amp is definitely recommended to get everything from it .

FYP do TAS1020B with 24 bit processing

broken buy another one la.